Scumbag congressional democrats have managed to narrowly pass a "funding bill" for the Iraq war. They only managed to pass it by tacking on billions of dollars in pork as Nancy Pelosi bought those last few votes that put her over the top. Of course, in addition to being full of pork, the bill also contains a deadline for withdrawl of US forces from Iraq. Bush has vowed to veto the bill if it reaches his desk and his veto will stick since the bill barely passed with no-where near the 2/3 majority needed to over ride a veto. This is political theature at the expense of our troops who need the funding now. Of course, congressional democrats couldn't care less about that, so long as they can pass another "nonbinding" resolution. Here's what Bush had to say: I seriously doubt the combo of gutlessness in both war and politics will be a winning one for Democrats. On the war, they support running away and do all they can to bring this about. Well, all they can short of voting to defund the war. This they lack the guts to do. Instead, they resort to crap like this.
How'd a bunch of papier-mâché heads find enough folks to actually elect them to serious positions of authority. Oh, wait. I've answered my own question.
NPR audio See NPR.org for available audio from March 23, 2007 All Things Considered: THOMAS MANN: Not much different. Actually the Democrats added $20 billion to the president's request ... most of that goes for additional spending in Iraq and Afghanistan ... veterans health-care ... disaster relief for Katrina ... additional funds for Homeland Security ... some agricultural subsidies ... all of these things tend to be in whatever supplemental is moving ... And they added a few other things, but there are no earmarks. Some of it can be defined as pork, but the vast majority is pretty standard. Also from March 23, 2007, Day to Day: JUAN WILLIAMS: ... it wasn't the conservative Democrats ... who were fighting .... To the contrary, it was liberal Democrats, people who are wanting U.S. troops out immediately, who said they didn't want to pass a $124 billion spending bill that would allow the war to continue .... It's ironic ... to think that it was the liberal wing of the party that was challenging Speaker Pelosi, and she had to load the bill with lots of incentives, some say "pork barrel" deals for peanuts and people in the Gulf Coast .... Sorry 'bout the sketchy transcripts. Fascinating audio clips, though. Have a listen. I found it interesting, though, listening to the President's remarks yesterday, that he called it "their money". Does Bush really think the money belongs to the Democrats? And as to "abdicating responsibility", no; Congress abdicated responsibility in 2001, when it started handing the executive blank authorizations slips to create all sorts of havoc. Nonetheless, information on the bill is available via Thomas: HR 1591 The summary on record for HR 1591 explains the spending as such: Makes additional appropriations for disaster relief and recovery related to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita to the Departments of Agriculture, of Commerce, of Defense (Civil), of Homeland Security, of Health and Human Services, of Education, and of Housing and Urban Development. Makes appropriations to the Secretary of Agriculture for emergency crop and livestock disaster assistance. Makes additional appropriations for specified purposes to the Legislative Branch and to the Departments of Agriculture, of Commerce, of State, of the Interior and of Agriculture (for wildfire suppression), and of Health and Human Services (for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and for response to an influenza pandemic). Rescinds specified unobligated balances of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Prescribes requirements for DHS contracts, subcontracts, and task orders. Requires each federal agency that has awarded at least $1 billion in the preceding fiscal year to develop and implement a plan to minimize the use of no-bid and cost-reimbursement type contracts. Makes appropriations to the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, to eliminate the FY2007 shortfall in funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Especially as we note that last point, DHHS appropriations "to eliminate the FY 2007 shortfall", it seems worthwhile to pause and reflect on the former GOP-led Congress that failed to attend to certain appropriations matters, especially after their defeat at the ballot box. And issues related to hurricane Katrina? Rita? Mmmmaybe, just maybe, these issues should have been handled in the past? As I recall, the Bush administration has taken heat recently for broad failures in the Katrina recovery? Just maybe. Flip a coin: commercially-interested opinion page, or publicly-funded news analysis? The specific reality probably lies somewhere in between. Anyway ... so says me.
Well, anyone who's willing to put all of that bullshit together and go to the trouble to post it, I simply must believe! But remember, if someone else posts something a little longer and more wordy, especially if they use a lot of big words, then I have to beleive them over you. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Baron Max
What do you expect from a bunch of people who couldn't even pass "The Most Important Non-Binding Resolution In History" - or whatever they were calling it ? In effect, failing to do anything about doing nothing... In fairness, as I understand the "S.O.P." in the House of Recidivists, this sort of thing is the norm, not the exception. Wasn't the recently passed Transportation Bill full of the same sort of pork ? IIRC, the last anti-terrorism bill was chock full O' bacon bits for the districts of select repeat offenders as well.
That's the way the game is played, boys. It's politics, don't act like Republicans don't also insert their own legislation in odd places, like that part of the patriot act that allows for any American citizen to be declared an enemy combatant, or the bit that allowed them to play politics with federal attorneys and not inform congress? The Republicans are using our troops as human shields, to avoid any questioning of our presence and role in Iraq.
Madanthonywayne: Whereas I think Bush has somewhat been fumbling this year, his resistance in the face of Democratic political theatre and shameless pork is refreshing. Sadly, responsibility is not something which wins as much votes as buying an industry off.
What trouble? All I did is find the readily-available links to two radio bits I heard the night before, and look up the bill in question. Who says you have to believe? There's the link. Look up the bill. Heck, I'm not even asking anyone to compare it to former bills. I haven't even gotten around to doing that. I'll make it easier: Click Here, it's the same link. That way you don't have to scroll back up. I also heard a bit, and I won't bother to look it up, about the spinach-derived E. coli outbreak last year: the going theory is apparently that the microorganism was delivered to the crop by nearby cattle or else wild pigs. Money to keep the domestic spinach industry afloat against wild pigs? Yeah, maybe it's pork. But it's also artificial bacon bits compared to real pork. Like the Hurricane Katrina recovery, y'know. Pure pork, that one. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Other than, perhaps, The Nation, there are few news outlets to the left of NPR. I actually listen to NPR a lot, and regard it as akin to monitoring enemy radio broadcasts. I especially like Car Talk, those guys are great. This American Life is pretty good too.
Does anyone actually believe this President cares about pork spending in appropriations bills? Or has any problem with political theatre when it's him playing "War President" ?
